School District Puts An End To Outrageous Gender-Neutral Standards

As Western Journalism recently reported, a school district in Nebraska received significant criticism after administrators adopted a series of restrictive standards proposed by advocacy group Gender Spectrum.

According to the guidelines imposed on Lincoln Public Schools educators, terms like ‘boy’ and ‘girl’ were to be avoided. Furthermore, separating students based on gender were deemed exclusive to those who might be confused about their sex.

“Instead, use things like ‘odd and even birth date,’” or separate on the basis of personal interests, the new rules dictated.

Related Stories

Whenever gender must be referenced, the guidelines state, “say ‘Boy, girl, both or neither.’”

Instead of ostensibly exclusive terms like ‘boys’ and ‘girls,’ teachers were instructed to address classes as “purple penguins” or some other nonsensical classification.

Amid the widespread controversy surrounding this decision, school board members ultimately opted to remove the guidelines. Hundreds of locals reportedly attended a meeting earlier this month, though many lamented the fact that their concerns were not adequately addressed. When 16 attendees showed up Tuesday night to once again voice their irritation, Superintendent Steve Joel announced the standards would no longer be distributed to school staff.

Advertisement - story continues below

“We need to make sure our resources are appropriate, purposeful and clear,” he explained, noting that the standards in question were not.

Lack of clarity, however, was not the only concern of those speaking out against the adoption of these guidelines. Many suggested the district showed favoritism toward those who believe gender identity is a fluid issue while dismissing those who gravitate toward a traditional view.

“Social advocacy groups are being listened to,” said concerned parent Adam Criswell, “but parents are not. There must be more transparency. There shouldn’t be anything given to teachers that parents shouldn’t see.”

Another attendee explained that she felt the board should have provided more than a mere explanation for its change of heart.